If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

It's very easy to catch up with the version numbers. Just adopt the Firefox/Chrome tradition of one major version per week! We'll run out of numbers in a year, then it's names, and three weeks later, we have Linux Blue.

Comment

It's very easy to catch up with the version numbers. Just adopt the Firefox/Chrome tradition of one major version per week! We'll run out of numbers in a year, then it's names, and three weeks later, we have Linux Blue.

But... there are infinite numbers. Maybe even more, but I stopped counting after infinite.

Comment

Then you are in luck (if that is a Windows 8 laptop). I saw they were having a hard time getting this right due to bad BIOS-es. Linux has to identify itself as Windows 8 to make things work, otherwise they will hit 'untested codepaths' in the BIOS causing stuff to break.

Comment

1. Linux is just a kernel. So the comparison to Windows is not appropriate.
2. The NT kernel is based on more design concepts. When Linus was designing the Linux kernel he based it on old generation ideas. The NT kernel is more "modern" is design and architecture. That is not to say that Linux kernel is not good.
After all, the ak-47 is of old design is and is still extremely successful. However, The FN SCAR is undoubtedly more technologically modern.

2.:
a. Per the subject at hand, the Windows 3.11 and the NT kernels are oceans apart (even though NT 3.1 was released a couple of months earlier).
b. The NT kernel relied *heavily* on the VMS kernel and OS2 kernel designs.
c. Assuming that you consider microkernels more modern, please keep in mind that the Linux kernel is just as hybrid as the NT kernel. (E.g. UMS graphics drivers, FUSE, udev, etc) while on the other hand, Microsoft is constantly moving functionality in and out of the kernel.
d. Given the fact that the Linux kernel has no need for backward compatibility and/or stable APIs, it has far less ancient code laying around (at least in core components). This is especially apparent when you compare the Windows file system(s?) to ext4/btrfs/etc or when you compare the Linux network stack to the NT stack.